Stroller Battle: Fresh Crop of Crossovers Wrestles for the Family Dollar

In the 15-some years that have passed since the launch of the first-generation Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V, two pioneers in what would become the compact crossover segment, things have changed tremendously. Not only did someone coin the term "crossover," but segment entries have multiplied exponentially while shedding almost all traces of their frumpy, confused origins. Of course, despite the small crossover's continually increasing popularity, not everyone is convinced. Most car lovers continue to profess a preference for hatches and wagons, only moving to minivans with gritted teeth when more space is needed under the cover of practicality. But wagon-loving enthusiasts are a sliver of the population, while crossover-loving families continue to multiply. The segment-leading Honda CR-V, for example, outsells the Dodge Grand Caravan and Chrysler Town & Country minivans combined.

Which Compact Crossover SUV Would You Choose?

Opting for this breed of family car doesn't necessarily mean languishing in automotive purgatory. The latest crop, particularly the all-new 2013 Mazda CX-5 and Ford Escape, brings style and driving fun to the table in addition to the usual mix of practicality and a rich feature set. This test's three other CUVS--Kia Sportage, Volkswagen Tiguan, and Honda CR-V (the reigning compact crossover king, victorious in the last comparison) -- also have some style and fun worked into their DNA. But which one represents the best combination, not to mention value -- a huge factor in the decision-making process of a new family that no longer has the disposable income it once did.All five front-drive crossovers you see here cost around $30,000, give or take a grand or two, are powered by four-cylinder engines (two even have turbos), and are fitted with navigation systems. Our proving ground? The freeways, avenues, and twisty backroads in the suburbs east of Malibu. - Kirill Ougarov

"Show me the money" is an oft-used movie quote, and if you want to see the Tiguan's money, it's under the hood, not on it. There were two things we all agreed on when it came to the VW: All the value is in the drivetrain, and the price tag is rather steep."Where's the value? You're paying for an engine here and nothing else," associate editor Rory Jurnecka opined. Executive editor Ron Kiino agreed. "Powertrain is great. This is what you're really paying for."It certainly is a good powertrain. The Tiguan was the quickest to 60 mph (by more than half a second) and through the quarter mile. Editors loved the smooth, torquey engine and its quick- and smooth-shifting six-speed automatic.

But we were disappointed with the ride quality. Senior features editor Jonny Lieberman declared it "really poor, especially compared with the Ford and the Mazda. Worse than the Honda, for sure, and maybe a tick better than the Kia -- maybe." The Tiguan rode hard and transmitted every bump into the cabin, though the impacts were never harsh or violent. Unfortunately, the VW didn't fare much better in the corners, where it felt tall and tippy -- traits exacerbated by the flat seats -- and sapped our confidence.

The track told the same story. The Tiguan set the fast lap on the figure eight with the highest average g, but mostly thanks to its strong engine. The 0.80g average it pulled on the skidpad fell on the low end of mid-pack. Braking from 60 mph, meanwhile, fell to the back of the pack at 123 feet, due in part to its virtually tied-for-heaviest curb weight of 3489 pounds.

Most of our concerns, though, were between the doors. As tested, the Tiguan was priced at least $1770 more than rest, but we had trouble seeing the value. For $31,345, we got a car with navigation, a panoramic sunroof, automatic windows all around, seat heaters, and rear-seat ventilation, but no automatic climate control, power seats (except the driver's seatback), leather, or automatic headlamps. While it wasn't missing any key feature, we couldn't help but note that the rest of the field had all the same features, and in some cases more, for less money. It didn't stop there. Complaints went against the smallest seats-up cargo area in the test, the heavy and hard-to-actuate folding rear seats, the plain and downmarket interior, and the rather pointless mesh sunroof cover.In sales, more-for-less deals work. Less for less is a no-brainer. Less for more, though, just doesn't make sense. That, in a nutshell, is why the Tiguan finishes in fifth.

4TH PLACE: 2012 Kia SportageBeauty Is Skin DeepBy: Michael Febbo

Kia has a reputation for approaching any category as a value proposition. Indeed, in this test, its well-equipped $28,600 Sportage EX wore the most attractive as-tested price tag. Unfortunately for the Korean brand, the only car it "outvalued" -- as in, the one most of us would buy after the Kia -- was the Tiguan. Further, about the only unique amenity on the Sportage was the cooled driver's seat -- apparently the passenger can deal with a sweaty backside -- though its extensive list of niceties can't be overlooked: navigation, smart key with push-button start, backup camera, 18-inch wheels, panoramic sunroof, heated mirrors, LED daytime running lamps.

Our testers all complained about suspension and chassis issues, calling the ride harsh yet poorly controlled. Kia has a knack for making a suspension too stiff and inaccurate, producing all the negatives of a sporty suspension with none of the positives. Online production manager Kirill Ougarov wondered, "Who tuned this suspension? Did anyone?" Jurnecka commented, "Wow, this thing is all over the place on Mulholland. Feels like in every corner it's trying to head in a different direction. Tons of body roll." Associate editor Scott Evans added, "Worst ride quality. Very hard, unnecessarily so. Lots of head toss, especially on the freeway." Lieberman summed it up as "goofy."

While opinions on the suspension were pretty unified, they differed on the interior. Everyone seemed to like the design, but felt let down by the materials. The dash is a beautiful piece of style executed in hollow-feeling molded plastic. Most of the vehicles in this comparison use a variety of soft-touch and hard plastics, but Kia appeared to cut more corners. The seats were described as everything from "as hard as a wooden chair" to unsupportive to plain hurtful. Nor was it just the seats. Lieberman aimed his sights right in front of his face, at the helm: "My nephew has toy dinosaurs made of nicer stuff than this steering wheel. Why would you make the part of the car the owner (and potential owner) touches the most the single worst-feeling part?"

The second-least-powerful 176-hp Kia was, unsurprisingly, the second-slowest vehicle from zero to 60 (9.1 seconds) and in the quarter mile (17.0 seconds at 81.2 mph). Everyone judged its six-speed automatic as the most seamless and responsive. Everyone also loved the Sportage's lowest as-tested price, lofty level of equipment, and standout styling. It still looks like it could double as an eye-catching concept. Its modern lines and good proportions made this the most admired exterior of the group. Sad to say, the marginal performance combined with aggravating ride comfort and handling really knocked it down in the rankings.

This comparison is why I don't read Motor trend. The foundation for the article assumes buyers are new families looking for featuresand a bargain. I'm driving a VW GTI on stilts. Its called a Tiguan. It is the best vehicle in the group by just about all reasonable factors.

Hello. I am planning to buy a compact crossover what I call small SUV. One of my questions is why is not Nissan in this list? Is the ford car a reliable car or its just all the accessories/extras what makes it attractive? I don't know much about car less about SUVs so that is why I'm asking. Is the murano consider a compact crossover? And is the Mazda a good value car? What about chevi? Thanks for all your help in advance.

The Mazda CX-5 is a pretty nice vehicle with one serious problem, it is dangerously underpowered and slow to a fault. The Escape is just OK but has had so many recalls it scared us. We test drove a Subaru Outback and absolutely loved the size, capability and comfort. So much quieter and drove much better than the Kia, Tiguan, Escape and MX5. It gets 30MPG hwy and has all wheel drive. It is bigger and still gets excellent mileage. Not sure why the Forrester wasn't compared to these but for our money the Outback was a much better choice.

The Ford escape looks like a van and more towards a chick car. The Mazda CX-5 looks so much better then the escape. Not to mention ford never has the right mileage. I test drove both and the Mazda has better handling, standard 17' alloy wheels, Bluetooth and has blind spot system on there mid trim car. MAZDA is more of a reliable car unlike Ford with engine fires on the new escape and the recalls the 2013 Escape had within a year. I own both Ford and Mazda vehicles(in my household) and retired from Ford, overall I choose the Mazda and I ended up buying the CX-5!

The Volkswagen review is puzzling. If you look on this same site, you will see a review of the 2012 Tiguan, titled: "First Drive:2012 Volkswagen Tiguan Mid-Cycle Tweaks Take VW's Small SUV To All-Star Status." It's full of contradictions, for example this review says the flat seats are not supportive, while the earlier review says "On some of the twistier mountain stretches between Munich and Kitzbuhel the seats provided lateral support completely unexpected in an SUV." So not sure what to make of either of these reviews. Now fully expect to read that the Escape is the worst SUV ever in the next 9 months.

I bought a CX-5 Grand Touring with the tech package for my wife about a month ago and can't be happier. The supposed "slowness" is way over blown. It's plenty quick for real world traffic. My wife even mentioned she finds herself often going faster than she thought when glancing at the speedo. We traded an Edge for it, and she hasn't mentioned a lack of power once. It does however get 60% better fuel economy than the Edge, and in the ride and handling department there is no comparison. The CX-5, much like the 3 I once owned, has a great combination of a supple ride and great handling. If you've never driven a Mazda they really do have superior suspension to any of the other Japanese makes, as well as the Koreans. They are very European in that regard. The only complaint my wife has is no power liftgate.

Mistake #1: I fell in love with the new Escape.Mistake #2: I bought the Escape . . . after vowing never to purchase another American-made vehicle.Mistake #3: Two major, engine-related recalls in less than a monththe first of which left me without the vehicle for over a week. (I knew it! Typical American automobile junk!)Note to self: Don't buy another American car. (Too bad this wasn't a Chevy . . . I could have returned it!)Oh, yeah, . . . good luck on getting the advertised fuel economy. It ain't going to happen!

Just bought one of these after reading this. I was down to the Kia and the Escape, however after the road test, it was no contest. I would have chosen a 2012 Escape over the Kia!! Ended up with a 2012 Escape SEL with the 2.0 Ecoboost. Could not believe the difference in ride, handling, refinement, etc. in the Escape compared to the CRV or Kia. Didn't look at the Mazda or VW tho. Also looked at the Dodge Journey, the Pentastar was noisy, rode and handled like a minivan, and fuel economy ratings were below the others. I've only had the Escape for 2 days now, so we will see as it ages.

What a terrible comparison. Kind of funny that MT didnt use the Sportage SX to be fair to Kia. WTF...I own a Sportage SX. MSRP of $29,740, it is turbo, direct injected, make 260 HP, does 0-60 in 7 seconds, and I average 21.5 MPG.

Sorry, but the Sportage is far and away the best looking CUV in this group. Step up to the SX for not a lot more money and it blows the doors off these competitors. The only place the Sportage is let down is the crappy Hankook tires that come standard. They're a big part of the reason for quotes like this "Worst ride quality. Very hard, unnecessarily so. Lots of head toss, especially on the freeway." Lieberman summed it up as "goofy." The only things goofy in this article is not blaming those notoriously bad tires and the looks of the new CR-V.

We've had the Ford (called Kuga here) Escape for almost 4 years, though it comes only with a 2.0L turbodiesel (140hp 2WD, and 163hp 4WD) and lots more torque than the US model. But I HOPE we get the US new front end treatment - with just a few differences, it is WAY cooler than the one we have in Italy. Too bad you guys don't get the 6 sp manual, tho.

Wait until next year when the CX5 will have a high torque Diesel ! Can't wait. Ford really has some good products lately, Im going to test drive that little 1.6 . Hondas day has passed, and the VW is just too unreliable.

I'm surprised by the outcome. The Ford is a nice mini-ute, but optioned out to compete with the Honda, it's pretty pricey. Plus, it's a Ford product, so I'm not sure about resale. The Mazda is under powered and, at least from what I've seen, seems to use lower quality materials. Exterior styling is a toss up among the three and will be up to the individual buyers to figure out. The new CR-V is sharply styled, but so are the other two.The new CR-V drives well (I disagree with the author on that note), but the usability of the interior is pretty awesome. When my wife looked at the car, she commented on how easy it was to fold down the seats and really liked the deep storage area next to the driver (perfect for her favorite enormous purses).The auto lift gate on the Escape is an interesting feature, but I wonder how many buyers will pony up for the extra cost of the option.

Sorry ne1butu the LA Times review of the 2013 Ford Escape upset you. The LA Times review speaks for itself. I did not write it, nor did I post on the LA Times. The review was so bad it required multiple posts to get the key findings out. Everyone needs to read the LA Times review before spending their hard earned money on a new car. And, I doubt Ford would be so stupid as to give the LA Times a defective unit.

Jimmy,How obnoxious. Really Four posts? It's clear that the LA Times got a defective unit. That's not to say that Motor Trend did. Clearly one of the posts on the LA Times' site is yours. Are you a paid shill on a campaign to talk smack about Ford now that they are the leader in this segment? Personally, I'd probably take the Tiguan. I've driven one and like it very much. Compared to the Honda and Mazda, it's a supermodel. I'd never own a Kia. And even though I believe the Ford's is the best looking and that the Sync issues are way overstated, I do want to wait to see how they optimize these systems better in the future.

A few more quotes from the LA Times article on the 13 Escape ... see below posts. "But the most common problem was the nav's wanderlust. After entering a destination, the vehicle icon would float around the map for as long as 20 minutes while the system tried to figure out where the Escape actually was. This happened throughout my week with the vehicle, whether I was moving or parked, and in locations all across the Los Angeles area."

A few more quotes from the LA Times article on the 13 Escape ... see below posts. "Problems with Ford's Sync system aren't limited to pre-production test vehicles and aren't new. The car-buying public has noticed too. Last year, Ford's rankings plunged in consumer surveys by J.D. Power & Associates and Consumer Reports, with an oft-cited reason being difficulties with Sync. Ford responded by sending customers flash drives with an update but clearly there is more work to be done."

A few more quotes from the LA Times article on the 13 Escape ... see below post. "We got off to a rough start when Sync wouldn't connect with my phone, a first since I've owned it. Then I needed directions, and our relationship got really ugly. Twice the input screen froze for almost a minute. Once, halfway through a trip, the entire MyFord Touch system crashed and wouldn't reboot until I pulled over and restarted the vehicle.""The other technologies had their problems too. The hands-free power liftgate claims to open with a subtle kick beneath the rear bumper, but in reality needed all sorts of foot gestures, jabs and wiggles to get the hatch to open. The cross-path detection, designed to alert you specifically to objects moving into your path as you back up, seemed to think parked cars and the large oak outside my apartment posed a threat."

If you consider a 13 Escape, I suggest you read the review in the LA Times. Very negative. After reading the problems found during the LA Times test drive of the 13 Escape, I wonder how Motor Trend can give it a high mark. Something is not right. And, ignore the comment by ryandaar1979. His comment seems to make an attempt to incorrectly summarize the complaints. Read the article yourself. The problems are disturbing. articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/14/business/la-fi-autos-ford-escape-review-20120614This LA Times article seems to validate the poor reliability rank Ford is getting from both Consumer Reports and JD Powers.Some quotes from LA Times:"Yet the $36,025 Escape Titanium four-wheel drive I tested piled on too many layers of unreliable technology. The effect was more instances of teeth-grinding, fist-clenching, guttural wails of undiluted anger than my blood pressure cares to admit.""The foot-activated power tailgate worked when it wanted to, the detection system for backing up was hyperactive, and the navigation system literally couldn't find itself. This, in an age when GPS devices are so ubiquitous that I'm pretty sure there's one on my washing machine telling me how to get to the dryer."

I don't agree with your opinions about the tiguan, I have a 2012 tig, my b5 passat was more "tippy" than my tiguan. I paid $24k for awd w/sunroof model. I looked at the cx-5 and the kia before i bought the tig, neither came close to the price of the tig with awd + interior options. Guess it doesn't matter though, if people wanted to be sensible we would buy a jetta sportwagon diesel or a subaru forester instead of the suvs/crossovers in this comparison.

@dlmac777, They didnt add the Forester and the Rav4 in the comparison because those cars are too old. The Rav4 is dur for a refresh this year and the Forester, well, you gotta wait 2 more years. Beisdes, the Foresters 4 spd wont compare with these.

I test drove the CX-5 and it really handles well.The Rav4 is a descent, clean cut vehicle so is the CR-V. Ford has decided to emulate the shape of the Rav4 and put the ugly catfish corporate design language, and that makes it clearly the ugly x-over of the bunch.

Just bought my wife a CX-5 and I love it. It definitely handles like the Mazda 3 of CUVs. Great suspension and great brakes. I was concerned about the lack of power but it is perfectly adequate in the real world. It doesn't feel any slower than our old Edge in traffic. If you notice in the test data the "slow" CX-5 has the same 45-65 mph passing time as the Escape.

ryandarr1979, I'm really not a cr-v fan and the escape outsold the cr-v in the US only. obviously because it's cheaper, it's American, and because people think they save the environment by buying a hybrid. and could you please explain (BORING) to me in terms of boring a compact 4x4 ? I mean there's always a corvette. right ?

@jimmy999, as I and many others have stated to you, with ZERO response from you, Ford's JD Power rating was hammered by complaints about how to use myfordtouch. Not manufacturers defects. I just read the LA Times review. They state the SAME thing, that the car is loaded with technology, and that tech takes time to learn how to use. If you dont read the manual and learn how to use the system, youre gonna have a bad time. Idiots who complain about a system they dont take time to learn, shouldnt have their complaints affect Ford's initial quality ratings, manufacturers defects should. If you cant program the time on a DVD player, you should stay away from myfordtouch. @brhm, you are clearly a biased CRV fan, as you stated you owned one. Good for you. It doesnt dismiss that you are ignorant for making a blanket statement about people you dont know. "the escape just got went into production on may or april"!?! what? By the way, the Escape outsold the CRV last year. Hondas of late are boring.

The CR-V is my pick. I wouldn't trust the resale value of the Ford. Mazda's CX-5 is good, but just too small. Although Ford continues to make huge strides with overall quality, you know the CR-V will prove reliable, whereas the Escape may be a different story a few years down the road...

"A perfect vehicle the Escape is not, but it is a big leap forward for Ford and the segment as a whole, because it proves you can get style, function, and fun in one well-priced package. Best of all, this one's from the home team."Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1209_2012_2013_compact_crossover_suv_comparison/viewall.html#ixzz1z0vvyFgVSays it all. Buy the Ford if you think UAW members are better Americans than people that respect the rights of others. Buyers that accept identical efficiency, diminished performance, and the life cycle of a small turbocharged engine will learn a valuable lesson. People that know better will continue to buy CR-Vs.

Gavas, you bring up some very good points; as do you BRHM. Today, most cars are expected to run 100,000+ miles trouble free but the resale value of the Honda is undenyable. Ford also had some trouble with thier new transmissions and while I have been critical of Honda's redesigns, I like this little CRV. I would like to see these compared to the established RAV4 (V-6) and Forester (turbo). I think the Ford, with its 2.0T would do well whereas the VW and Honda might fall further behind. Out of this grouping, I would drive them first but most likely choose the CRV.

Gavas, in 2008 I bought a 2007 cr-v it had 33k miles and I just sold it a few days ago at 130k miles, all I did was change the oil and filter regularly. changed the tranny oil twice. and the windshield wipers once. it never stopped at any point. the only thing I hated about the cars was the 22mpg. I paid 21k and sold it for 15k. now that I'm stuck thinking what car I should buy. could you please help me choose something marginally as good as a cr-v ?

@ Jay.CHow can you call it a BS article if you haven't driven both?BTW, VW suspensions take a while to get "broken in" from my experience. I did not have that same experience with my Ford. That could play into the handling comments. I also find that I got used to the more harder ride of the VW.Some companies, like Subaru and Mazda, tend to strike a nice balance of sporty feel without having the jittery or jolting ride that many VWs before their suspensions get broken in.

blacydyna must have MISSED the memo where Toyota execs ADMITTED that their designs were on the BORING/BLAND side (same went for Lexus), but Toyota designers didn't exactly turn over a new stone with the "new" Camry.And no, sticking the horrid "Predator" grill on an otherwise generic design doesn't make a design more "exciting" (see Acura).

brhm, the cr-v is (marginally) a best-seller because middle-aged overweight women need transportation and that's what their cousin/brother/nephew recommended. The PERCEIVED (and I emphasize that) reliability of Hondas/Toyotas is marginal at best compared to other brands (everybody makes very reliable cars nowadays) and I believe is more the result of relative lack of technology in Hondas/Toyotas relative to others. For example, Ford got hammered by JD Powers mainly because of MyFordTouch. If they didn't offer MFT most likely they'd be right on par with Honda/Toyota in the rankings.

brhm, I can name the 2001 Ford Ranger I own and hasn't skipped a beat over the years although I use it exclusively to tow/haul things. A Corolla I used to own years ago on the other hand needed a new transmission around 60K miles.

ryandarr1979, the escape just got went in production on may or april. you think that's enough to make it a winner ? and could you please tell me why the cr-v is the best seller in the US when it only returns 21mpg ?

brhm:Try and inform yourself better before spewing such drivel. I've owned many Ford products over the years. I can tell you with empirical accuracy that the RELIABLE power trains on these vehicles were what sold me. "Cute" is not a criteria to be honored when buying a car.